What constitutes legitimate self-defense is what court must carefully consider

A 22-YEAR-OLD IN GUANXIAN COUNTY, East China’s Shandong province, who stabbed to death one of the local gangsters sent by a loan shark to bully and threaten the man’s mother after she failed to repay a high-interest loan, was sentenced to life imprisonment in February. People’s Daily commented on Saturday:

What happened to the mother and son has sparked a heated debate over what constitutes legitimate self-defense. The son, witnessing his mother enduring unbearable humiliation including slapping and sexual harassment for more than an hour, eventually fought back with a fruit knife and injured four gangsters, one of whom died in hospital.

The court in the first trial ruled that the son’s action was not legitimate self-defense, because the “debt collectors” were unarmed and the local police were present. The danger facing the mother and the son was limited and thus did not justify the son’s violence.

The court of the second instance should take seriously the situation that led to his actions. For example, the police did show up and try to persuade the gangsters not to use violence, but they then attempted to leave without explaining why, which probably made the son believe that he and his mother were helpless.

Emotionally traumatized and infuriated by what was happening to his mother, the 22-year-old was apparently emotionally distraught when he grabbed the knife.

The incident raises many questions, such as: What is the proper thing to do when a loved one faces unbearable humiliation? How to distinguish between an assault and legitimate self-defense? Under what circumstances can one legally defend oneself and others?

The laws are not just about setting rules and boundaries, but also about protecting people’s safety and dignity. That is why the case is being closely watched.